Healthy Living

The latest study to demonize foods free of GMO ingredients and mercury-containing high-fructose corn syrup ultimately once again fails to accurately address key aspects of the conventional verses organic debate and even falls short of properly addressing the limited scope of concerns it does attempt to analyze. You can see even from the comments on many of the mainstream reports that readers quickly saw through the eroneous ‘organic is the same as conventional’ headlines and began highlighting the many inaccuracies of the research.

As I outline in the video, the study completely fails to account for key factors such as the presence of GMOs, artificial sweeteners like aspartame and sucralose, mercury (such as that admittedly contained in high-fructose corn syrup), BPA, and much more. It also does not even properly address the two topics it seeks to address concerning the presence antibiotics and chemical residue. The researchers fail first of all to reveal the difference between the organic food and conventional food pesticides, and then go on to state that organic food actually does have lower pesticide levels.

They then state that it doesn’t matter that conventional foods have higher pesticide, herbicide, and insecticide levels because they don’t ‘exceed legal limits’. They then fail to mention that Roundup, Monsanto’s best-selling herbicide, has been linked to DNA damage, infertility, and over 29 other associated diseases. Yet they insist that there is no real difference. That is not even taking into consideration the thousands of other studies on pesticides and insecticides, such as the 3 pieces of mainstream peer-reviewed research linking pesticide exposure to lower IQ.

Apparently these factors don’t matter to the Stanford researchers, who utterly ignored them as they compiled their analysis that actually contradicts itself over and over again.

The report also admittedly states that organic foods have a drastically lower percentage chance of containing antibiotic-resistant bacteria, the kind that produces mutant superbugs that cannot be treated with antibiotics. The very same kind that have evaded all antibiotics and ‘super drugs’ and are virtually untreatable by mainstream medicine. A new strain of resistant tuberculosis known as the ‘white plague‘ has even started to spread that is the result of rampant antibiotic use across the globe.

Conventional farm animals are dosed up with these antibiotics to prevent them from dying as a result of the serious illnesses they come down with. The animals are stricken from both eating a poor diet often full of genetically modified grain as well as sitting stationary in a claustrophobic area for years. Around 30% of cows in the United States are also injected with Monsanto’s genetically modified synthetic hormone known as rBGH, which is banned in 27 countries worldwide. Apparently the fact that the genetically engineered rBGH uses molecules and DNA sequences that are the result of molecular cloning doesn’t matter to the Stanford researchers.

The list could go on and on. Overall, it seems quite apparent that the researchers really have no idea what the word ‘health’ entails. While even the very few aspects they examine seem to heavily favor organic food items, the hundreds of other essential factors are wildly overlooked in the report that does nothing but push back the general public’s notion of what true health is by about 30 years.

Post written byAnthony Gucciardi:Anthony is a natural health and human empowerment writer, speaker, and entrepreneur whose writings have appeared in #1 USA Today and Wall Street Journal Best-Selling books and top 100 websites.
After overcoming Lyme Disease and nerve-related facial paralysis, Anthony's work now reaches several million readers per month through his highly prolific group of social media pages and websites.
Focused on self-development techniques and living a healthy lifestyle, Anthony currently sits on the Advisory Board to Natural Society in addition to managing and directing several other companies dedicated to enhancing social good.
Anthony's work routinely appears on both alternative and established websites and television programs alike, including Drudge Report, Thom Hartmann, Simple Reminders, RT, Infowars, Michael Savage, Gaiam TV, and many others.

It depends what they mean by conventional and organic, if conventional means food that is industrially produced and packed with a lot of pesticides and artificial chemicals or is GMO and organic is the food that is as pure and as free from the above mentioned additives as possible, "natural", taken right from the nature in some small farm, then the study or the research is not accurate and is misleading the people with some evil intention in mind. But if with organic they mean the food that is produced and grown in the same way as the conventional food and is only advertised as "organic", then the researchers may be right, because of the obvious reason. People will have to decide on their own which statement is the right one.

Now days a number of people are suffering from both mental and physical health fall issues and these are just because of worst eating practices or worst food choice. The use of pesticides are rapidly increases in food production therefore we are getting less nutritious foods now days so to get better and beneficial changes in our health issues we have to follow the trend of natural eating and organic eating practices.

Before our century' increasing mechanization in industry was only seen as a boon by industry chiefs. Less outlay on labor of course translated to more profit. In the twenty-first century, industries increasingly fell under the control of the state, while continuing mechanization (Crew oil refining) and 'social justice' created an ever-growing underclass of unemployed and unemployable. This class was generally kept under control by the medias bread and circuses of our times, (Soap operas and football to name but a few), but problems increase with the growth in the numbers of people being displaced by increasingly 'expert' mechanization and ever increasing use of hydrocarbons – Increasing numbers of people less easy to control. To manage this, the political classes chose to find employment for them; chose to bring them into the fold by creating a huge and pointless bureaucracy, but even that had its limits. It soon became evident that not all could be thus employed. The world were 10% of the population used 90% of the energy did not exist anymore It soon also became evident that with population booms, and ever increasing percentages of third world countries developing into second and first world economies, too many educated people were available. The answer was simple: cripple education Systems, Banksters given free hands to gamble and rob blind all and dis-inform that growth is GOD but in reality it is death. Feed the masses with processed food devoid of micro nutrients, and necessary vitamins but full of chemicals, additives, Preservatives, pesticides and more ensuring bovine stupor; this fact can be seen in most obese persons. Unregulated the health and social professionals = drug dealers not healers, issuing pacifying drugs (Prozac and Retalin but to name a few), mutilating both bodies and minds even while still in mother’s wombs, ensuring more of them end up in the more easily controlled, obese, depressed and drugged underclass. However even this has proven only a temporary solution, as the biomass of +7.000.000.000 and counting. Humans that all use 10 calories of nonrenewable energy for every calorie consumed is far past un-sustainable. The only individuals raising grave concern and complaining are deemed Luddites and conspiracy theorists and are ignored by the masses in their mindless naivety (who only see a the area between their TV,s and the shopping mall). It is a mathematically certainty that more drastic measures will need to be applied, and this very soon as the global species extinction rate is so alarming its past any form of realistic contrivable savior except potentially by mass extinction be that by an extreme plague of airborne potent Ebola virus or by mass extinction when available fossil fuels run out and the ecosystem has totally collapsed. In an utopian world where one child per woman and vegetarian life styles was by law strictly enforced, where craft and corruption would constitute serious penalty’s, and where honors, accolades were given to persons who create, save and engineer striving for a better cleaner natural world, not to banksters, usurious thieves, leaches and evil persons who by their actions and insane profit driven policies are committing despicable heinous crimes against our innocent children each and every day, primarily due to stupidity, malicious materialism and greed. The few surviving children of the next generations will look back at us with disgust and incomprehension, in much the same manner as we look back upon Hitler, Pol Pot and King Loepold II.

I almost totally agree with you Paal, except on the fact of stupidity being a cause of corporate crimes against us and our children. These materialist, greedmongers are not stupid, they have an agenda. The NWO, they put us through disease/cancers to get the last scraps of our $$$$ before we die. Chemo is sanctioned torture and murder, stop the madness of these monsters!! Hemp economy now!! Cannabis oil cures cancer++

Puteo's right when he writes "Looks like someone hasn’t done their research and has no clue about any of the subjects discussed". Anthony G.'s text at the head raves mostly about things that weren't part of the study, and gets his facts wrong about the rest (such as rBST and the source of TB multi-drug resistance).

I was referring to John's comment. Anthony is on target, I suggest YOU do some research. rBST is a genetically modified, cloned hormone that is BANNED in 27 nations. But I guess you think it's perfectly safe?

So, let me get this straight. You start by blasting the media for skewing the reporting of a literature review (which surveys the existing peer-reviewed literature and doesn't do new research) then blast the report of the review (which is not the review). Finally you look at the review itself, but ignore that the review cannot make statements that aren't well supported by the peer-reviewed published evidence (contradictory because the evidence from different studies is contradictory). If there is an absence of evidence (no good data), that is not the same as evidence of absence (no effect) and that's what this review says – little evidence of health benefits. You can make all the conjectures you wish about various health effects, but without the data, you can't get it past a peer-review (for very good reason). Get the data, publish and I'll be on your side. But you can't just claim health effects without data. This review is claiming that there is insufficient data. So lobby congress to increase NSF funded research into food so we can get the data.

one point about GMO corn is that it cannot self propogate. so is it just like regular non-gmo corn? that alone tells you it is not the same as natural corn. It's like a mule, you have to have a donkey and a horse to make a mule. Two mules cannot breed and make another mule… they are sterile. they are real and strong but cannot self propagat. They are not sustainable just like the gmo corn. that fact alone tells you there is a significant difference in the product. Also, gmo corn needs 2 specific pesticides to protect it from pests. you can pontificate in an intelligent voice all day long and it won't change those facts. so go eat your gmo corn. Also, research the x-Monsanto executives that now sit on the FDA there something corny going on here.

Sorry the facts contrast conventional wisdom, but as Freakonomics has shown, they often do. France and the UK did extensive research in the recent past and came away with the same conclusion; organic foods pose no health concerns, nor provide any health benefits unless you take into consideration the psychology or the consumer. The organic food advantage is simply a marketing ploy and now that the huge food corporations have adopted the strategy, we see a shift to "local" and fresh food that are not shipped which is a true blessing. Anyone who truly understands the chemistry in today's modern food supply system knows "organic is healthier" = BS.

The FDA and Big Agriculture thanks you for your support. There's nothing to see here. Another good example were the plethora of studies that proved that smoking was not a health problem. Course they were all funded by RJR Reynolds or Philip Morris.

There are many things this study hasn't taken into account for instance: Mercury. But look at the health of the average American around you. Our risk of cancers are sky high. Autism and Alzheimer's are more numerous then ever. And even more troubling is the hormonal shift happening in adolescents. (The rate of pre-teen girls developing faster than previous generations) All of these problems despite the fact that we have more prescription medicines than ever before. There is actually a study linking new monsanto gmo products to malignant tumors in Rats.

My mom smoked for 40 years. And when she started in college. She told me later that she knew it was bad. She knew it wasn't normal to cough as much as she did. But she smoked anyway. Everyone 'knew' she said. Weather they admitted it or not. Sometimes the facts DON'T contrast conventional wisdom. Sometimes conventional wisdom is right (weather they say it out loud or not).

If govt will weaponized anthrax and mail it out to citizens, we should also be suspicious of tuberculosis that is resistant to antibiotics, not to mention all the other germs like the weaponized syphilis they now call Lyme's disease.

The best defense for our health, in terms of germs, is colloidal silver.

But, be sure to get an ionic form, like Advanced Silver DOT com or similar.

Psychology Today on the news stand today: talks about some of the research around physical and mental health, and cognitive concerns that come from the exposing children & adults to pesticides.

Here are some some parts of their article:

ADHD:Montreal researcher Maryse Bouchard found that “almost everyone-96 percent of kids-had detectable levels of organophosphates in their urine.” “Children 8 to 15 years old whose urine contained above average concentrations of organophosphate metabolites had double the odds of meeting the diagnostic criteria for ADHD.”

IQ:“Among 329 children from farm-workers families, most recently tested at age 7, researchers found a seven-point difference in IQ between those whose mothers recorded the greatest exposure (to organophosphate pesticides) and those whose mothers had the lowest.”

Brain Function: In another study of organophosphate exposure, “mothers who registered higher levels of exposure during pregnancy-in tests of cord blood or urine- have demonstrated significant deficits in perception and memory compared with those whose mothers tested relatively pesticide-free.”

Parkinson’s Disease: “A 2009 study reported in the American Journal of Epidemiology looked at 368 people who had been diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease, the neurodegenerative condition characterized by disabling tremors, between 1998 and 2007. All 3689 lived within 550 yards of farm fields that had been sprayed with pesticides for at least five years prior to their diagnosis.”